heart wrote:Transmission occur when you recognize, no matter where you are. But, if you ever received transmission alone with your teacher there is for sure a great difference in depth.

/magnus

What is "depth"?

I suppose magnus means "significance" ...

Sönam

By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.- Longchen Rabjam -

By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.- Longchen Rabjam -

By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.- Longchen Rabjam -

I'm just trying to determine if this "depth" is the same thing Adamantine was talking about which I think is "just" "atmosphere". Because for me transmission is transmission. IMO you don't get it more than others if in private, if you get more that is just because of you yourself, not because it's in private. The atmosphere was for sure different when I received transmission while physically present near my teacher, but the transmission was just the same. Also, Rinpoche occasionally quips how people came to him after the teaching and asked him to make an appointment in private with him because they have something important to talk about and then when they meet they asked him to give them direct introduction, even though he just gave it during the teachings. So for him there also seems to be no difference whether he's doing it privately or publicly. Though of course, maybe not all teachers work this way.

As for honey, if we both taste it, where would there be difference in taste? When you taste it, you taste it. Perhaps you can say you tasted it more strongly than me or something similar but that is only because of you yourself and nothing else.

Although many individuals in this age appear to be merely indulging their worldly desires, one does not have the capacity to judge them, so it is best to train in pure vision.- Shabkar

I'm just trying to determine if this "depth" is the same thing Adamantine was talking about which I think is "just" "atmosphere". Because for me transmission is transmission. IMO you don't get it more than others if in private, if you get more that is just because of you yourself, not because it's in private. The atmosphere was for sure different when I received transmission while physically present near my teacher, but the transmission was just the same. Also, Rinpoche occasionally quips how people came to him after the teaching and asked him to make an appointment in private with him because they have something important to talk about and then when they meet they asked him to give them direct introduction, even though he just gave it during the teachings. So for him there also seems to be no difference whether he's doing it privately or publicly. Though of course, maybe not all teachers work this way.

As for honey, if we both taste it, where would there be difference in taste? When you taste it, you taste it. Perhaps you can say you tasted it more strongly than me or something similar but that is only because of you yourself and nothing else.

What I mean with "depth" is mainly the time you manage to rest in recognition. Not sure if you understand that.

/magnus

"To reject practice by saying, 'it is conceptual!' is the path of fools. A tendency of the inexperienced and something to be avoided."- Longchenpa

So you mean depth as time measurement? The amount of time one rests in recognition? Is this it?

So, if I am understanding you correctly, magnus, you are saying that when one receives introduction, being physically closer to the lama makes one rest longer in recognition? Perhaps the conditions for this to happen are more appropriate, like not having much noise or something. Or do you think the quality of introduction differs?I'd say resting in recognition hardly depends on being physically close to the lama when one receives introduction, but mostly on the training one does after receiving introduction.

heart wrote:What I mean with "depth" is mainly the time you manage to rest in recognition. Not sure if you understand that.

Ah, I see. I don't find it hard to believe that a longer time would be easier one on one.

Dechen Norbu wrote:So, if I am understanding you correctly, magnus, you are saying that when one receives introduction, being physically closer to the lama makes one rest longer in recognition? Perhaps the conditions for this to happen are more appropriate, like not having much noise or something.

I don't think that's something odd. It's the same with practice, especially in the beginning. Easier to do in some conditions than others.

Although many individuals in this age appear to be merely indulging their worldly desires, one does not have the capacity to judge them, so it is best to train in pure vision.- Shabkar

Dechen Norbu wrote:So, if I am understanding you correctly, magnus, you are saying that when one receives introduction, being physically closer to the lama makes one rest longer in recognition? Perhaps the conditions for this to happen are more appropriate, like not having much noise or something.

I don't think that's something odd. It's the same with practice, especially in the beginning. Easier to do in some conditions than others.

Yes, it's not odd. There's also the case of the teacher answering closer to you individual needs since he is one on one with you and all that.What I'm asking is if magnus thinks there's a difference in the quality of the introduction due to proximity. He speaks about quantity (time period resting in recognition) and this is not difficult to conceive. I am wondering if he thinks physical proximity changes the quality of the introduction somehow. Perhaps I'm just being led by the word "depth", which I always assumed to mean more profound.

Pero wrote:I'm just trying to determine if this "depth" is the same thing Adamantine was talking about which I think is "just" "atmosphere". Because for me transmission is transmission. IMO you don't get it more than others if in private, if you get more that is just because of you yourself, not because it's in private. The atmosphere was for sure different when I received transmission while physically present near my teacher, but the transmission was just the same. Also, Rinpoche occasionally quips how people came to him after the teaching and asked him to make an appointment in private with him because they have something important to talk about and then when they meet they asked him to give them direct introduction, even though he just gave it during the teachings. So for him there also seems to be no difference whether he's doing it privately or publicly. Though of course, maybe not all teachers work this way.

As for honey, if we both taste it, where would there be difference in taste? When you taste it, you taste it. Perhaps you can say you tasted it more strongly than me or something similar but that is only because of you yourself and nothing else.

Ok ... no it's not a question of "atmosphere", but I still have difficulty to found an accurate terminology. DI, eye in eye with the master give a strength to the experience ... and the meaning (that's why I used "significiance") of it as a much bigger impact. The consequence, if I refer to the 3 statements of Garab Dorje, would be that the second statement is shortened ... but those few words do not give the taste of the honey.

Sönam

By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.- Longchen Rabjam -

By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.- Longchen Rabjam -

How would you define that strength? Pero asks a very relevant question, IMO. Is it a matter of atmosphere or a difference in the actual quality of recognition? By quality I don't mean the amount of time you rest in it although resting longer could perhaps be considered having an experience with more quality than having just a glimpse, thus an experience with less quality.

Hum, let me put it like this: it's like tasting honey. You taste a little spoon or a whole jar. The taste is the same, but if you have a whole jar you can get more acquainted with it. However, the honey doesn't taste differently just because you have a jar. So, what does maguns mean? The taste of the honey changes because one has a whole jar or one just gets more acquainted with it? This is what I'm asking.

Dechen Norbu wrote:What I'm asking is if magnus thinks there's a difference in the quality of the introduction due to proximity. He speaks about quantity (time period resting in recognition) and this is not difficult to conceive. I am wondering if he thinks physical proximity changes the quality of the introduction somehow. Perhaps I'm just being led by the word "depth", which I always assumed to mean more profound.

There is no difference in quality, just time. I think you also might understand that there are some unique opportunities opening up at such a moment.

/magnus

"To reject practice by saying, 'it is conceptual!' is the path of fools. A tendency of the inexperienced and something to be avoided."- Longchenpa

Sönam wrote:And I start to feel that it was an error to speak about ...

Sönam

Yes, I think it's not good to be talking too much in this way. That's why I haven't been joining in. I regret raising the issue. People allwill have different experiences, maybe they recognized, maybe they didn't but think they did. Only the Lama canconfirm, and when you're one on one you have the opportunity to clarify. Beyond this, there's no pointin discussing and dissecting with words, even if there's more to it.

Contentment is the ultimate wealth;Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha

Sönam wrote:And I start to feel that it was an error to speak about ...

Sönam

Yes, I think it's not good to be talking too much in this way. That's why I haven't been joining in.

That's funny, I thought the same about some posts related to the original topic. As for the current discussion I don't think anyone said anything too much yet, it seems pretty general to me, with no details about ones personal experience being conveyed.

Although many individuals in this age appear to be merely indulging their worldly desires, one does not have the capacity to judge them, so it is best to train in pure vision.- Shabkar